Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

    I thought this article was interesting. Decided to post it in it's own thread in case anyone wanted to discuss it. I bolded some stuff for you scanners.


    Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question
    by Mark Montieth
    Pacers.com Writer
    @MarkMontieth
    Posted: Nov 23, 2015

    Last May, when Frank Vogel and Larry Bird first sat down to discuss the Pacers' future, Bird made it clear he wanted to adjust the roster and coaching strategy to accommodate a smaller, faster and more versatile lineup.

    Vogel couldn't have been blamed for objecting. The most recent injury-shattered season aside, he had a fresh memory of two teams that reached the Eastern Conference Finals by playing "smash mouth" basketball, big, physical team that leaned heavily on a bruising defensive style and a structured halfcourt game. Put all the pieces back together, a strong argument could have been made for making another deep playoff run.

    Vogel didn't try to make it. Not for long, at least.

    "I was open-minded," he said Monday. "I was intrigued by it. I liked the way we played, we had a lot of success, and I was comfortable if we came back and played the same way. I related that to Larry, but I also told him I'd be very intrigued if we wanted to go with this type of approach."

    This type of approach has the Pacers moving up in NBA ranks that are both obvious and arcane. They are 8-5 overall following an 0-3 start, two games back of conference leader Cleveland. They have the NBA's best defensive rating over the last 10 games, according to the league's advanced stats. They rank 18th in offensive efficiency (points per 100 possessions), and have averaged 101.7 points over the past 10 games. They're coming off their two highest-scoring games of the season, including a 123-point performance against Milwaukee on Saturday that was their most since Feb. 20, 2013.

    In the combined offensive and defensive rating differential, which measures their play at both ends and factors in pace of play, they rank fifth in the league, behind Golden State, San Antonio, Cleveland and Boston.

    Vogel and his players readily admit to their room and need for improvement, but the current run is indeed intriguing. Paul George is having, statistically, the best season a Pacers player has had since George McGinnis in 1974-75, in the ABA. The depth is good enough to cause headaches for Vogel, who has found a 10-man rotation isn't enough to accommodate everyone who deserves to play. And chemistry is improving.

    Vogel says he's not surprised by the current run, given what he saw from his roster when training camp opened.

    "It's honestly who I thought we were going to be," he said. "I like what this team's ceiling is, and I don't know what the ceiling is."

    Perhaps the most encouraging thing for Vogel is that he now has a roster versatile enough to match up to any style of play. The ones that lost to Miami in the conference finals in 2013 and '14 had difficulty with the Heat's smaller lineup that spread the floor and put the likes of Roy Hibbert and David West in space against quicker players.

    He believes it has the potential to be as good defensively as any of his previous teams, but in a different way. It might not block as many shots, but it should be able to defend better on the perimeter.

    "Playing smaller lineups is not just about being more prolific offensively, but giving us better defensive speed and versatility and to be able to guard the rest of the league, which is playing small," he said.

    He also has a roster that can score three at a time instead of two. The Pacers are on pace to hit the second most 3-pointers in franchise history. They're currently hitting 8.8 per game, and that average is rising. They hit 15 against the Bucks. Only the 2007-08 team averaged more (9.0). For comparison sake, Larry Brown's conference finalist squad in 1994 averaged 2.2. None of the ABA teams averaged more than 3.6.

    Vogel believes there's more room for improvement on offense than defense, but plenty of room at both ends. His players seem to agree.

    "We're moving the ball better, guys are moving and cutting, but we need to figure out certain sets we can go to when things get stagnant," C.J. Miles said. "You need to figure out what guys can respond to. That's what Coach is trying to do."

    Defensively, communication can be better.

    "We have some slackage on the defensive end," Jordan Hill said. "Helping each other out on defense is definitely a key. We're getting there, but we still have a lot of work to do."

    "We're still picking up on things to do, not to make it easier, but to make us way more effective," Miles added. "Because of the steals (the Pacers rank second in the league, with 10 per game) it seems we're there, but there's a lot of things we can clean up."

    So many that it's difficult to predict anything this early in the season. Hill, though, threw out a guess.

    "We've got the players, we've got the staff, we've got the tools to at least be up there in the top four, top three in the (conference) standings," he said. "It's going to take a lot of hard work, but we're getting there."

    Vogel is quick to warn against complacency, which is perhaps the greatest compliment to his team's current state. Three games into the season, after a 21-point homecourt loss to Utah, he was still having to prove his – and Bird's – approach was the correct one, and that he could make it work. Now he's reminding everyone his team hasn't arrived.

    "We have a heckuva tough stretch coming up," he said, referring to a schedule that brings five road games in the next six. "We can't get ahead of ourselves and start feeling good about ourselves.

    There's a lot to adjust to and implement, and see how it works against the heavyweights."

    That's why Vogel doesn't know the altitude of his team's ceiling. One thing's for sure, though: he's no longer ducking under it.
    http://www.nba.com/pacers/pacers-app...onger-question
    Last edited by Strummer; 11-25-2015, 02:43 AM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

    Great article about open mindedness and accepting transition. Notice how the "Paul George is playing PF" is no longer a thing. In a way it is kind of too bad, because that would be the only time ESPN would cover us.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

      This is shaping up to be a pretty exciting year!
      Go Pacers!

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

        I think it still is a question. I mean, we've been shooting insane so far, and PG has been playing out of his mind. I don't know that the things that have made us successful thus far are completely sustainable in the long run. Obviously, I like what I've seen, and I wouldn't have it any other way, but fourteen games does not a season make.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

          Originally posted by LG33 View Post
          I think it still is a question. I mean, we've been shooting insane so far, and PG has been playing out of his mind. I don't know that the things that have made us successful thus far are completely sustainable in the long run. Obviously, I like what I've seen, and I wouldn't have it any other way, but fourteen games does not a season make.
          What do you mean? The team is elite defensively and is approaching that area on offense as well. Why wouldn't the defense be sustainable given our players and our coaches? Because the matador and 25 minutes of Roy Hibbert are both gone? We defend the stretch (read: modern NBA) teams better than ever and there are very few teams that feature low post players on offense. Once Myles Turner is healthy again we'll have three above average paint defenders (counting LaVoy Allen, who has been criminally underrated on that side imo), two of whom can guard stretch bigs as well. One note on Mahinmi, it's early in the season but his defensive rating is absolutely insane. If only he could learn to shoot free throws.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

            The defense is sustainable. The hot shooting isn't. We're taking (and making) too many contested shots. That won't keep up.

            Hopefully though the change in perception of our shooters changes the way opponents defend us and frees up other offensive options. We're all still waiting for the other shoe to drop on Monta.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

              Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
              What do you mean? The team is elite defensively and is approaching that area on offense as well. Why wouldn't the defense be sustainable given our players and our coaches? Because the matador and 25 minutes of Roy Hibbert are both gone? We defend the stretch (read: modern NBA) teams better than ever and there are very few teams that feature low post players on offense. Once Myles Turner is healthy again we'll have three above average paint defenders (counting LaVoy Allen, who has been criminally underrated on that side imo), two of whom can guard stretch bigs as well. One note on Mahinmi, it's early in the season but his defensive rating is absolutely insane. If only he could learn to shoot free throws.
              Please don't tell me that Pacers Digest is going to counter every criticism of this team, even the slight one offered in my post, with a knock on Roy Hibbert. My post was not about Roy Hibbert. In fact, I specifically said "I like what I've seen, and I wouldn't have it any other way". That was to ward off exactly this kind of straw-manning. I just want to be able to analyze the current team without having to compare it directly with the previous iteration.

              I would disagree with you about Myles Turner's defense too, but it doesn't seem worth an argument at this point. In my opinion, we haven't really seen enough of the kid to make any declarations one way or the other. And here again, I'd like to be able to talk about the weaknesses in Turner's game without having Roy Hibbert or David West thrust into the conversation.

              Our opponent points per game is good for fourth in the league, especially impressive now that we are pushing the pace on offense, but our opponents are still shooting 44.1% from the field, which puts us around the league average. My major concern, however, is the three-point shooting disparity; we are shooting .416 (which would rank as the second best of all-time if maintained) and our opponents are shooting just .320 (which is what only Philadelphia and Charlotte shot last season). Both numbers should be expected to move more towards the middle, which will make things tighter going forward. While we've outscored teams by a combined 84 points this season (+6.0 differential), our differential in the last three games alone has been +83! We might not have as much wiggle room as it appears.

              Lastly, I'm just not sure how much of our team success should be placed on the system versus the simple fact that Paul George is playing again. Like many of you, PG's return spurred a prediction of playoffs from me, and he's been better than any of us could have imagined. I imagine the new style has helped PG out - and it certainly has done wonders for C.J. and Ian - but to what degree I can't say. PG was great before the injury, and he's better now. And we're mostly winning games on his shoulders.

              I'm not ready to say the "approach is no longer in question". It looks good, sure, but the small sample size and recent blowouts are heavily skewing things towards the positive. I'm skeptical that we can continue to win at this pace, but hopeful that we might - even if we have to find different ways to do it. Excited to see how we fare on that upcoming West coast trip.
              Last edited by LG33; 11-26-2015, 02:29 AM.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

                why's cherry a "flavor" when strawberry is clearly the greatest of the red fruits?

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

                  that goes for yellow banana stuff too. that **** don't taste like no damn banana, it tastes like yellow.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

                    Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                    The defense is sustainable. The hot shooting isn't. We're taking (and making) too many contested shots. That won't keep up.

                    Hopefully though the change in perception of our shooters changes the way opponents defend us and frees up other offensive options. We're all still waiting for the other shoe to drop on Monta.
                    Plus we are also still in the process of learning this new system. Every time they talk about things yet to improve it is things like setting screens and moving the ball w/o turning it over etc... so, there's still room for growth in getting those better non-contested shots as well, and they know it.

                    Thankfully they aren't content with where they are at and know there's still much to improve on. We've seen a huge difference & improvement just from the start of the season, hopefully they keep working at it.
                    "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

                      Originally posted by LG33 View Post
                      Our opponent points per game is good for fourth in the league, especially impressive now that we are pushing the pace on offense, but our opponents are still shooting 44.1% from the field, which puts us around the league average. My major concern, however, is the three-point shooting disparity; we are shooting .416 (which would rank as the second best of all-time if maintained) and our opponents are shooting just .320 (which is what only Philadelphia and Charlotte shot last season). Both numbers should be expected to move more towards the middle, which will make things tighter going forward.
                      3 point defense is something of a point of emphasis for us. Since Vogel's first full season, our 3P% defense has ranked #16, #1, #4, #11, and now currently #5 in the league. Yes, that gaudy .320 only ranks 5th in the league. It's not that we're doing something unsustainable, it's the league as a whole shooting worse on average so far. I expect our 3P defense to remain strong.

                      Our old defensive system was based on protecting the paint and controlling the defensive boards. The system change can be seen in the Opponent FG% and in DRB% - we have declined considerably in both areas. But the new system has different points of emphasis. We're now #2 in the league at forcing turnovers and #5 at getting steals. The question perhaps is whether a defensive system based on steals and turnovers can be a top ranked defense all season long. I think yes, because our defensive stats look a lot like Milwaukee's last year, and Milwaukee ended up being the #3 defense. For comparison's sake, last season MIL's opp eFG% is 0.487, DRB% is 73.3, TOV%is 15.9. So far this season, our opp eFG% is 0.484, DRB% is 74.8, TOV% is 16.6. Uncannily similar actually.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

                        Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                        The defense is sustainable. The hot shooting isn't. We're taking (and making) too many contested shots. That won't keep up.

                        Hopefully though the change in perception of our shooters changes the way opponents defend us and frees up other offensive options. We're all still waiting for the other shoe to drop on Monta.
                        When the shots stop falling due to the wear and tear of the season, then we will see if the defense is sustainable. Transitions off of missed 3's will not reduce the pace and will likely lead to a pretty significant uptick in opposition scoring. I don't want to see that happen but it is difficult to see a scenario where it wouldn't.

                        It also struck me that despite the best 3 point shooting performance in league history that produced 19 makes = 57 points only resulted in a 17 point win. Other than that the two teams were very close statistically with what I feel was a slight overall edge to the Wizards. If our defense and offense are doing so great, why didn't the final score end up a bigger blowout? In my opinion it is the same reason the Pacers would play pretty much any team very evenly but still lose more often than not under JOB - speed is an equalizer on the court because offensive efficiency and movement are reduced in importance while at the same time less defense is played overall due to less time offenses are in half court sets. The difference right now is that the Pacers have had better shooters from beyond the arc than the JOB teams had, resulting in more scoring and less transition defense required and that has led to more wins.

                        Living by the 3. As the Warriors are demonstrating, in the current NBA it is indeed possible to do on a consistent basis and it can lead to the Promised Land. I just hope the Pacers have enough horses to be able to something similar.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

                          Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                          The difference right now is that the Pacers have had better shooters from beyond the arc than the JOB teams had, resulting in more scoring and less transition defense required and that has led to more wins.

                          Living by the 3. As the Warriors are demonstrating, in the current NBA it is indeed possible to do on a consistent basis and it can lead to the Promised Land. I just hope the Pacers have enough horses to be able to something similar.

                          This team definitely has better shooters than the JOB teams but they also have two extremely good defenders in PG and GHill and a good mobile big in Ian, That and a very deep bench makes this a very dangerous team. In the playoffs there will be a slower pace and defense will be paramount.
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

                            The depth of this team will help a lot as the season wears on.
                            {o,o}
                            |)__)
                            -"-"-

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers' Approach No Longer a Question - Mark Montieth article

                              Montieth is the king of writing puff pieces that tow the company line, but they are always enjoyable articles when you agree with the position that he's taking.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X